Re: [Gimp-developer] Pencil - Tool Options and Hardness

[C R <cajhne gmail com>]

> > Speaking as a digital painter (samples available upon request), I can
> tell
> > you the Pencil tool does not replace a pencil brush. In fact, the pencil
> > tool acts nothing like a pencil at all. :) Could re-name it the
> > "pixel-tool".... but it absolutely sucks at being a pencil in just about
> > every way it possibly could. ;)
>
> Perhaps you could list specific characteristics of a Pencil tool that
> would not suck? :)

Sure, but we already have multiple pencil tools in the MyPaint brushes that
would work great for that... anti-aliasing is essential for a realistic
pencil mark, don't you agree? :)

If the general idea is to make the Pencil tool (more) useful, pointing
> out existing deficiencies, then sketching a proposal would be a lot
> more constructive.

No, we're discussing the pencil tool as a digital painting tool. It's a bad
pencil tool, but it's NOT a bad pixel tool. That's my point. :)



> > Your input is welcome. It's important to find a good solution that makes
> > GIMP easier to use. Great ideas don't come from only seasoned digital
> > painters, so thanks for all your input.
> >
> > So thanks again for your contribution to the conversation.
> >
> > I'm not willing to get rid of it unless we can put the functionality
> > somewhere else.
>
> This part of the conversation puzzles me. Elle is acknowledged
> contributor to GIMP as per AUTHORS, but you aren't.


That's true. I've never heard of AUTHORS though. Is that acronym on the
website somewhere? :)


> So how come _you_
> welcome _her_ input?


Don't you? I definitely welcome her input, and I assume most people who
have been following and commenting on these lists do as well.

You're trying to say since I'm not a developer, I can't tell Elle that I
(and other designers and programmers, and other members of the community
that I know) value her input?

Or are you saying that my compliment and reassurance is worth nothing
because I'm not in the authors list? She expressed concern over her input
in an area of knowledge that I have lots of experience in... should I not
say that Elle's input is welcome?

When I say that it's welcome, that's because it is. That means that I'll
read it carefully, process it and think of new solutions to help in making
suggestions for GIMP, that can then be acted on (or not) by interested
parties.


> And who is that "we" that can put the
> functionality somewhere else? Am I missing a vital point here?

Already answered this before. "We" is the community. The community is made
of everyone involved in the GIMP project who can act to improve it. So if
we as a community decide it's worth changing, then we can change it. I
mean, that's usually the point the point of the developer mailing list, no?

I can't change it myself, nor would I presume to act by myself even if I
were able to. When I talk about things we are discussing related to GIMP, I
use "we" with the qualifier "can" because we can do it, if we decide we
want to. I'm not saying "we will", notice. Is that what you think? That I'm
trying to represent everyone, and make decisions for them? If so, please
understand, that's not at all what I mean.

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine <
alexandre prokoudine gmail com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 5:55 PM, C R wrote:
>
> > Speaking as a digital painter (samples available upon request), I can
> tell
> > you the Pencil tool does not replace a pencil brush. In fact, the pencil
> > tool acts nothing like a pencil at all. :) Could re-name it the
> > "pixel-tool".... but it absolutely sucks at being a pencil in just about
> > every way it possibly could. ;)
>
> Perhaps you could list specific characteristics of a Pencil tool that
> would not suck? :)
>
> If the general idea is to make the Pencil tool (more) useful, pointing
> out existing deficiencies, then sketching a proposal would be a lot
> more constructive.
>
> > Your input is welcome. It's important to find a good solution that makes
> > GIMP easier to use. Great ideas don't come from only seasoned digital
> > painters, so thanks for all your input.
> >
> > So thanks again for your contribution to the conversation.
> >
> > I'm not willing to get rid of it unless we can put the functionality
> > somewhere else.
>
> This part of the conversation puzzles me. Elle is acknowledged
> contributor to GIMP as per AUTHORS, but you aren't. So how come _you_
> welcome _her_ input? And who is that "we" that can put the
> functionality somewhere else? Am I missing a vital point here?
>
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> gimp-developer-list mailing list
> List address:    gimp-developer-list gnome org
> List membership:
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
> List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list